Acting AG Matthew Whitaker: I Would Indict Hillary Clinton

As we reported earlier Jeff Sessions turned in his resignation Wednesday afternoon and the President announced Sessions Chief of Staff, Matthew Whitaker will assume the role of Acting Attorney General.

To the horror of Democrats Whitaker is also replacing Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein in overseeing the Mueller witch hunt.

The DOJ’s Matthew Whitaker is described as a "Trump loyalist". Whitaker has also been privately known as the West Wing’s “eyes and ears” in the out of control Justice Department, according to the dubious New York Times. We do know that Trump likes Whitaker and said of him that he is a “great guy.”

Democrats are “outraged” that in August of 2017, Whitaker penned an op-ed for CNN titled, "Mueller's Investigation of Trump is Going Too Far." Whitaker argued that Special Counsel Mueller is roving outside of his jurisdiction to investigate Trump-Russia collusion.

And as usual with Democrats and their always faithful lapdogs in the media, there is more ... The left is howling that in July 2016, before the presidential election, Whitaker penned an opinion piece for USA today where he argued that Hillary Clinton should be behind bars. And what prosecutor worth his salt, who sees someone as guilty – would not want them behind bars and with Hillary, guilt is hardly in question.

According to FBI Director James Comey's statement on Tuesday, former secretary of State Hillary Clinton could have been charged with violating several different code sections, and he detailed the evidence that supports bringing criminal charges.

Yet, Director Comey's judgment was that "no reasonable prosecutor" would bring the case. I disagree. I believe myself to have been a reasonable prosecutor, and when the facts and evidence show a criminal violation has been committed, the individuals involved should not dictate whether the case is prosecuted ...

...A reasonable prosecutor may ask, if on numerous occasions, an unknown State Department employee had taken top secret information from a secured system, emailed that information on a Gmail account, and stored the information on a personal server for years, would that individual be prosecuted? I believe they would.

But despite what seems to be sound reasoning for a prosecutor and a logical conclusion the left will keep up the recusal drumbeat as long as anyone will listen. Seems strange that the left has no problem with Comey declining prosecution of Hillary Clinton, which he has no legal authority to do because it is the prevue of the Department of Justice, yet when a DOJ employee who is charged with such responsibilities states an opinion there is absolute outrage.